Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Friday, September 21, 2012

Decentralize Or Die!

The single most often broached argument that Liberty Movement writers, analysts, and strategists are confronted with by skeptics alongside well meaning but cynical newcomers is the assertion that while we happen to be very effective at pointing out the dangers of globalism and centralization, we rarely seem to take the initiative to offer “solutions” to the problem. This same argument is also used by establishment shills as a way to distract the public’s attentions from the very real despotic enterprises of their elitist employers. It is an often used disinformation tactic; demand that those who expose the truth of a criminal enterprise also offer an all encompassing solution to the complex dilemma. When the truth-tellers cannot present a neatly packaged miracle on a gold plated platter, the shills claim that their exposures of wrongdoing are meaningless, because they can do nothing about it anyway. And thus, the cycle continues…
In reality, the contention that the Liberty Movement offers no solutions is entirely false. We have constructed many. The problem is that these solutions are not the kind that the general American public wants to entertain. The average person desires a “silver bullet” answer to every crisis. They want quick, they want easy, and most of all, they want to sit back and relax while this silver bullet is set in motion by someone other than themselves.
The best and most practical solutions are almost never easy. They require time, overwhelming effort, and painful sacrifice. It is a law of nature; the weight of an obstacle must be met with equal or greater energy to be removed. The greater the enemy, the greater the cost. There is no such thing as a “silver bullet” or an easy way out. Yes, the Liberty Movement offers answers, but many people refuse to hear them.
When it comes to violent centralization and collectivism in the form of totalitarian rule, our options are indeed limited. The masses often pursue politics first, because it is much easier to hand one’s responsibility and vigilance over to a leader instead of taking on the monster alone. It is much easier to “hope” for “change”, rather than take matters into our own hands and struggle through the mire and pitch of our thoroughly corrupt system. Of course, politics is a game, a game that can be controlled by the very same despicable men we wish to dethrone.
Next is civil disobedience, which is useful to a point, as long as the offending government deems it necessary to APPEAR fair and just. When the oligarchy no longer needs to play good cop, simple protest and activism falls apart. In the face of unrelenting malice and destructive subjugation, waving signs and chanting phrases is utterly senseless.
More